SSDhttp://www.maximumpc.com/taxonomy/term/21356/
enSamsung Portable SSD T1 Reviewhttp://www.maximumpc.com/samsung_portable_ssd_t1_review2015
<!--paging_filter--><h3>The little engine that could</h3>
<p>With the US still lagging behind the rest of the developed world when it comes to the availability of high-speed Internet, there's still a lot of need for high-capacity external storage. It's also a good idea to have local system backups. A few years ago, your choices were mostly clunky 3.5-inch drive enclosures that needed external power. We've since graduated to sleek 2.5-inch units that get their juice straight from USB 3.0 cables that shuttle bits between the drive and your PC. Today, Samsung is taking it a step further with the Portable SSD T1, an external solid-state drive that can operate in the neighborhood of SATA III speeds.</p>
<p>An enterprising gearhead can get most of the T1's functionality by purchasing an internal SSD and a drive enclosure that supports UASP (USB Attached SCSI Protocol). In short, UASP lets an external storage device use commands normally reserved for internal storage devices. The two key differences between UASP and standard USB are the ability to deal with data requests in an arbitrary order, and the ability to process multiple data requests at once. This can boost your performance by hundreds of mehabytes per second, putting UASP drives in a completely different performance class from USB 3.0. As you might imagine, this also requires a more sophisticated USB controller on the motherboard, and a driver for your operating system. Your mobo manufacturer customarily provides drivers or software to enable the UASP function of its USB controller.</p>
<p><img src="/files/u160416/samsung_portable_beauty_620_corrected.jpg" alt="Samsung Portable SSD T1" title="Samsung Portable SSD T1" width="620" height="413" /></p>
<p>The Portable T1 has an additional advantage, however, and it's not the compact dimentions. It has integrated drive encryption. When you plug it into your PC, it will ask you to set a password for your new drive. You don't have to set one immediately. You can do it later by double-clicking the turquoise gear icon in your system tray and clicking on the arrow next to the drive's security status. Your password can be up to 22 characters, which isn't as long as we could like, but the only way to reset it is to wipe the drive. This is actually a good thing. An external drive whose encryption can be bypassed with a physical switch or a call to customer support isn't all that encrypted.</p>
<p>You can set up all kind of fancy encryption with that SSD that you've put into a UASP enclosure, but it's not going to offer encryption out-of-the-box. It needs third-party software to interact with the drive before it's secured. Having this built into the drive is a big advantage for non-expert users. If you don't need encryption, or you don't mind the logitistics of using third-party encryption software, then getting your own internal SSD and a UASP enclosure is definitely more cost-effective; the 250GB version we tested has a list price of $179.99. The 500GB version comes in at $299.99, and the 1TB is $599.99. They may end up selling for much less than the list price, which happens frequently with PC components. But it's starting out on the high end. Right now, you can get a 960GB Sandisk Ultra II internal SSD for $350 from NCIX US, and a UASP enclosure from Amazon for less than twenty bucks (which comes with a USB 3.0 cable). Most internal SSDs in that size range hit between $400 and $450, but the price difference is still pretty significant.</p>
<p>Its performance isn't too shabby, either. Without UASP, the drive will transfer data in the neighborhood of 200MB/s, which is very respectable. It still leaves the Sandisk Extreme Pro at the top of the heap when it comes to external storage speeds. That's ironic, because it's just a thumb drive. The Portable T1 has 250GB, 500GB, and 1TB capacities, though, so there's that. The Extreme Pro's largest size is 256MB.</p>
<p>With UASP in the mix, the Portable T1 leaps ahead of the pack, with a sustained read speed of 433MB/s, and a sustained write speed of 355MB/s, according to CrystalDisk Mark. But your results will vary. When paired with an Asus Rampage IV Extreme motherboard, we couldn’t manage a sustained read speed of more than 350MB/s. When we plugged it into a USB 3.0 port on the back of a Gigabyte Z77X-UD5H, we could read at around 450MB/s, but the write speed maxed out at only 85MB/s. We tried another port on the back, and the sustained write speeds jumped up to 355MB/s. It's not the drive's fault, but it is disappointing to see this much variance from one USB controller to another, even on the same motherboard (which will sometimes use multiple controllers). PCMark Vantage also locked up while attempting to test this drive, but it reports a somewhat abstract score, rather than actual performance numbers, so it's not critical to our understanding of the drive's capabilities.</p>
<p>The Portable T1's cable is also extremely short, measuring only about four inches long. This is perfect for laptop users, but desktop users will have the device basically dangling off one the ports on their case. We also regret to report that it uses a bright blue LED to indicate connectivity, though it's a small one, thankfully. It doesn't look like the electronics industry is in any hurry to return to the red LEDs we used for decades that never distracted the retina. On the bright side, it continues to push the envelope of external storage performance. In that light, our benchmark chart compares the drive to internal SSDs, since it completely outclasses non-UASP external drives. It's still not ideal for sustained high-bandwidth things like HD video editing, but it's a surprisingly snappy little unit otherwise.</p>
http://www.maximumpc.com/samsung_portable_ssd_t1_review2015#commentsexternal drivePortable T1Reviewsamsungsolid state drivessdstorageUASPUSB 3.0ReviewsSSDTue, 20 Jan 2015 15:06:33 +0000Tom McNamara29278 at http://www.maximumpc.comIntel 730 Series SSD 480GB Reviewhttp://www.maximumpc.com/intel_730_series_ssd_480gb_review
<!--paging_filter--><h3>An overclocked enterprise SSD, priced accordingly</h3>
<p><a title="intel" href="http://www.maximumpc.com/tags/Intel_0" target="_blank">Intel</a> has largely been absent from the high-end SSD market for many years, which has been a real head-scratcher, considering the original X-25M’s dominance back in 2009. That all changes this month with the release of its all-new <strong>730 series SSD</strong>. It springs from the loins of its data center SSDs, which use validated NAND and Intel’s enterprise-level controller technology. To emphasize this heritage, Intel isn’t bragging about the drive’s overall speed, but instead notes the drive is rated to handle up to 70GB of writes per day, which is higher than any other SSD on the market by a huge margin. It features capacitors to protect data being written in case of a power outage, which is an unusual but not unprecedented feature on a consumer SSD. Intel also backs the drive with a five-year warranty.</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><a class="thickbox" href="/files/u152332/ww_13_18_small_0.jpg"><img src="/files/u152332/ww_13_18_small.jpg" alt="Intel’s new flagship SSD is validated for a whopping 70GB of writes per day." title="Intel 730 Series SSD 480GB" width="620" height="437" /></a></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><strong>Intel’s new flagship SSD is validated for a whopping 70GB of writes per day.</strong></p>
<p>To create the 730 Series, Intel has basically taken the NAND flash and controller from its data center–oriented S3700 SSD and bumped up the clock and interface speeds. If you recall the “SSD overclocking” demo Intel held at Pax last year, this is the result, though Intel decided against letting consumers overclock the drive. Instead, it did the overclocking at the factory so that the drives could be validated at those speeds. To drive home the point that this is an SSD made for enthusiasts, Intel has even adorned it with a sweet-looking Skulltrail badge.</p>
<p>The drive is a 7mm unit, so it will fit inside an ultrabook, but is available only in 240GB and 480GB capacities. It’s odd that it’s not available in 750GB or higher capacities, but our guess is Intel is afraid of the sky-high sticker price that such a drive would require; the two capacities it’s offering are priced very&nbsp; high at $250 and $490, respectively. The drive features Intel’s 20nm MLC NAND and its own third-generation controller. It’s ditched SandForce, along with all the other SSD makers in the business. One interesting note is that since this is an enterprise drive, it essentially doesn’t have a “low-power state,” so it’s not intended for mobile usage. Also, it consumes 5W under load, which is double the consumption of even a 7,200rpm mobile hard drive.</p>
<p>When we strapped the 730 Series drive to our test bench, we saw results that were a bit slower overall than we expected. It topped the charts in AS SSD, which measures read and write speeds of incompressible data, but the Intel drive was only a smidge faster than most, and not by enough to make it stand out, as they are all very fast. It was a bit slower than average in straight-line sequential read speeds, topping out at 468MB/s for reads and 491MB/s for writes. While this is still plenty fast, it’s a bit short of the 550MB/s Intel claims the drive is capable of, which is totally saturating the SATA 6Gb/s interface.</p>
<p>It was also oddly slow in the ATTO benchmark, which has a queue depth of four and is a “best case scenario” for most drives. It scored just 373MB/s for 64KB-read speeds, compared to 524MB/s for the Samsung 840 Pro. We ran the test several times to verify, so it’s not an aberration. It placed mid-pack in PCMark Vantage, but was slower than its competition in our real-<br />world Sony Vegas test, where we write a 20GB uncompressed AVI file to the drive.</p>
<p>Overall, this drive is a bit of a conundrum. We have no doubt it’s reliable, as Intel has always been strong in that regard and this drive is full of safety-oriented features. But is it more reliable than a Samsung 840 Pro for the average consumer? We doubt it, and therefore the drive’s extra-high price tag doesn’t make much sense. If Intel realizes it’s no longer the only game in town and adjusts the price a bit, it’ll be a much more competitive drive, but as it stands, we must give it a so-so verdict of 8.</p>
<p><strong>$490,</strong> <a href="http://www.intel.sg/content/www/xa/en/homepage.html">www.intel.com</a></p>
http://www.maximumpc.com/intel_730_series_ssd_480gb_review#commentsHardwareIntel 730 Series SSD 480GBmaximum pcMay issues 2014solid state driveReviewsSSDWed, 06 Aug 2014 16:36:43 +0000Josh Norem28289 at http://www.maximumpc.comSeagate 1TB Hybrid vs. WD Black2 Dual Drivehttp://www.maximumpc.com/seagate_1tb_hybrid_vs_wd_black2_dual_drive_2014
<!--paging_filter--><h3>Seagate 1TB Hybrid vs. WD Black2 Dual Drive</h3>
<p>Every mobile user who is limited to just one storage bay wants the best of both worlds: SSD speeds with HDD capacities. Both Seagate and WD have a one-drive solution to this problem, with Seagate offering a hybrid 1TB hard drive with an SSD cache for SSD-esque performance, and WD offering a no-compromise 2.5-inch drive with both an SSD and an HDD. These drives are arch rivals, so it’s time to settle the score.</p>
<h4>ROUND 1: Specs and Package</h4>
<p>The WD Black2 Dual Drive is two separate drives, with a 120GB SSD riding shotgun alongside a two-platter 1TB 5,400rpm hard drive. Both drives share a single SATA 6Gb/s interface and split the bandwidth of the channel between them, with the SSD rated to deliver 350MB/s read speeds and 140MB/s write speeds. The drive comes with a SATA-to-USB adapter and includes a five-year warranty. The Seagate SSHD uses a simpler design and features a 1TB 5,400rpm hard drive with an 8GB sliver of NAND flash attached to it, along with software that helps move frequently accessed data from the platters to the NAND memory for faster retrieval. It includes a three-year warranty and is otherwise a somewhat typical drive aimed at the consumer market, not hardcore speed freaks. Both drives include free cloning software, but since the WD includes two physical drives, a USB adapter, and a longer warranty, it gets the nod.</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><a class="thickbox" href="/files/u152332/wd_endeavor_quarter_left_higres_smal_0.jpg"><img src="/files/u152332/wd_endeavor_quarter_left_higres_smal.jpg" alt="WD’s Black2 Dual Drive is two individual drives in one enclosure, and it has the price tag to prove it. " title="WD Black2" width="620" height="620" /></a></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><strong>WD’s Black2 Dual Drive is two individual drives in one enclosure, and it has the price tag to prove it. </strong></p>
<p><strong>Winner: WD Black2</strong></p>
<h4>ROUND 2: Durability</h4>
<p>This category is somewhat of a toss-up, as the WD Black2’s overall reliability is degraded somewhat by the fact that it has a spinning volume attached to it, giving it the same robustness of the Seagate SSHD. There’s also the issue of the WD Black using the slightly antiquated JMicron controller. We don’t have any reliability data on that controller in particular, but we are always more concerned about the SSD controller you-know-whating the bed than the memory, which is rated to last for decades, even under heavy write scenarios. Both drives also use two-platter designs, so neither one is more or less prone to damage than the other. In the end, we’ll have to go with the Seagate SSHD as being more durable, simply because you only have to worry about one drive working instead of two.&nbsp;</p>
<p><strong>Winner: Seagate SSHD</strong></p>
<h4>ROUND 3: Performance</h4>
<p>Seagate is very clear about the performance of its hybrid drives, stating that they “boot and perform like an SSD,” but it never says they’re faster. It also claims the drive is “up to five times faster than a hard drive,” which seems like a bit of a stretch. It’s difficult to actually benchmark a caching drive because it won’t show on standard sequential read tests, and it gets killed by SSDs in access time tests. That said, we did see boot and PCMark Vantage scores improve significantly over time. Our boot time dropped by more than half, going from 2:27 to 1:07 after several boots, and our PCMark Vantage score shot up from 6,000 to 19,000. Still, these times are much slower than what we got with the WD SSD, which booted in 45 seconds (the system had three dozen programs installed), and hit 33,000 in PCMark Vantage.</p>
<p><strong>Winner: WD Black2</strong></p>
<h4>ROUND 4: Cloning Package</h4>
<p>Both drives include free software to help you clone your old drive and, in an odd twist, both companies use Acronis software to get ’er done. Seagate’s software is called DiscWizard, and works on OSes as old as Windows 98 and Mac OS 10.x. WD throws in a copy of Acronis True Image, though it only works with WD drives attached via the included USB-to-SATA adapter. We tested both software packages and found them to be nearly identical, as both let us clone our existing drive and boot from it after one pass, which can be tricky at times. Therefore, we call the software package a tie since they both perform well and use Acronis. However, WD’s $300 bundle includes a USB-to-SATA adapter that makes the cloning process totally painless. Seagate makes you forage for a cable on your own, which tips the scales in WD’s favor.</p>
<p><strong>Winner: WD Black2</strong></p>
<h4>ROUND 5: Ease of Use</h4>
<p>This round has a crystal-clear winner, and that’s the Seagate SSHD. That’s because the Seagate drive is dead-simple to use and behaves exactly like a hard drive at all times. You can plug it into any PC, Mac, or Linux machine and it is recognized with no hassle. The WD drive, on the other hand, only works on Windows PCs because it requires special software to “unlock” the 1TB hard drive partition. For us, that’s obviously not a problem, but we know it’s enraged some Linux aficionados. Also, the WD drive only has a 120GB SSD. So, if you are moving to it from an HDD, you will likely have to reinstall your OS and programs, then move all your data to the HDD portion of the drive. The Seagate drive is big enough that you would just need to clone your old drive to it.</p>
<p><strong>Winner: Seagate SSHD</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><strong><a class="thickbox" href="/files/u152332/laptop-sshd-1tb-dynamic-with-label-hi-res-5x7_small_0.jpg"><img src="/files/u152332/laptop-sshd-1tb-dynamic-with-label-hi-res-5x7_small.jpg" alt="Seagate’s hybrid drive offers HDD simplicity and capacity, along with SSD-like speed for frequently requested data. " title="Seagate SSHD" width="620" height="639" /><br /></a></strong></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><strong>Seagate’s hybrid drive offers HDD simplicity and capacity, along with SSD-like speed for frequently requested data. </strong></p>
<h3 style="text-align: left;">And the Winner Is…</h3>
<p style="text-align: left;">This verdict is actually quite simple. If you’re a mainstream user, the Seagate SSHD is clearly the superior option, as it is fast enough, has more than enough capacity for most notebook tasks, and costs about one-third of the WD Black2. But this is Maximum PC, so we don’t mind paying more for a superior product, and that’s the <strong>WD Black2 Dual Drive</strong>. It delivers both speed and capacity and is a better high-performance package, plain and simple.</p>
<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-style: italic;">Note: This article originally appeared in the April 2014 issue of the magazine.</span></p>
http://www.maximumpc.com/seagate_1tb_hybrid_vs_wd_black2_dual_drive_2014#commentsHard DriveHardwareHDDReviewSeagate 1TB HybridssdWD Black2Backup DrivesHard DrivesReviewsSSDFeaturesThu, 31 Jul 2014 19:27:45 +0000Josh Norem28103 at http://www.maximumpc.comWD Black2 SSD+HDD Reviewhttp://www.maximumpc.com/wd_black2_ssdhdd_review_2014
<!--paging_filter--><h3>One drive to rule them all</h3>
<p>The WD Black2 is an answer to the prayers of mobile users who have just one drive bay but want the speed of an SSD with the capacity of a hard drive. Unlike a hybrid drive, which stores all data on a hard drive but uses a limited amount of flash storage for caching, the WD Black2 features an all-new design whereby a single 2.5-inch enclosure houses both a hard drive and an SSD—two distinct drives that appear to the OS as such, so you can put your OS on the SSD and your data on the hard drive. It’s a brilliant solution that unfortunately gives up a bit of performance in order to conform to the small form factor, but if we had just one storage bay in our notebooks, we’d upgrade to this bad mutha immediately.</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><a class="thickbox" href="/files/u152332/wdfmobile_black2_small_0.jpg"><img src="/files/u152332/wdfmobile_black2_small.jpg" alt="The Black2 delivers a 120GB SSD and a 1TB HDD in a slim 2.5-inch package." title="WD Black2 SSD+HDD" width="620" height="481" /></a></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><strong>The Black2 delivers a 120GB SSD and a 1TB HDD in a slim 2.5-inch package.</strong></p>
<p>The drive is a 9.5mm unit, so it won’t be sliding into any ultraportables—those require a 7mm drive—but it will fit just fine in a larger notebook. The SSD portion of the drive is a 120GB unit that uses 20nm MLC NAND flash, though the NAND manufacturer is unknown. It utilizes a JMicron controller as well as DRAM onboard cache. There is also a Marvell SATA bridge chip that allows both drives to share the lone SATA 6Gb/s interface. The hard drive portion is a two-platter, 5,400rpm model with 1TB of capacity, and its “Black” designation indicates that it’s one of Seagate’s “high-performance” drives, but with hard drives we don’t expect blistering performance anymore. We’d just like them to not suck too hard, and for mobile duties they need to conserve power, so they don’t have very big shoes to fill. The drive includes an outstanding five-year warranty, and is Windows-only at this time, as it requires software to “unlock” the 1TB partition. Once unlocked though, the partition is visible on any system, or at least it appeared on all the Windows machines we connected it to; we did not verify this with a Mac or Linux machine. You can’t use two of these drives in RAID, nor can you span data across both partitions.</p>
<p>WD lists the drive’s performance specs for the SSD as offering 350MB/s read speeds and 140MB/s write speeds, but it doesn’t list any numbers for the hard drive. In our testing we found the SSD to offer slightly faster read speeds, hitting 429MB/s in ATTO, and its write speed of 129MB was very close to spec. That’s not as fast as even a midrange SSD, however, so we would not enlist it for heavy usage or any video work. The hard drive portion averaged 114MB/s read and write speeds in testing, which is good enough for data storage but not super impressive. Also, since both drives share a SATA interface, transferring data to both drives simultaneously can cause a traffic jam—we saw read speeds on the SSD drop about 100MB/s when copying data to the hard drive at the same time.</p>
<p>All in all, this drive is clearly a compromise, but one we’d be willing to live with if we were constrained by a single storage bay. The SSD is fast enough, and 1TB of storage is bodacious, as well. If it were faster it would earn a Kick Ass award, but for now we’ll probably have to wait until Gen 2 to satisfy all of our desires.</p>
<p><strong>$300,</strong> <a href="http://www.wdc.com/en/">www.wd.com</a></p>
<p><span style="font-style: italic;">Note: This review was originally featured in our March 2014 issue of&nbsp;</span><a style="font-style: italic;" title="maximum pc mag" href="http://shop.futureus.com/tech/maximum-pc.html?sourcekey=WSMAXFTB" target="_blank">the magazine</a><span style="font-style: italic;">.</span></p>
http://www.maximumpc.com/wd_black2_ssdhdd_review_2014#commentsHardwareHDDMarch issues 2014ReviewssdWD Black2ReviewsSSDThu, 24 Jul 2014 21:56:43 +0000Josh Norem27973 at http://www.maximumpc.comOCZ Vector 150 240GB SSD Reviewhttp://www.maximumpc.com/ocz_vector_150_240gb_ssd_review
<!--paging_filter--><h3>A high-endurance Vector arrives</h3>
<p>The SSD world is a bit stale these days, as we all wait for the industry to move beyond the SATA 6Gb/s interface. Most high-end drives have been able to saturate the bus for a while now, so manufacturers have been looking for ways other than performance to differentiate their products from the competition. Though we awarded the original OCZ Vector the vaunted Kick Ass award, the drive came out of the gate as one of the most expensive SSDs available, and the price never really dropped much over the past year. Sure, it’s smokin’ fast, but $300 for a 256GB SSD is too much, considering its competition is just as fast and less expensive. OCZ has addressed this problem by moving to a smaller, more-efficient process for its NAND, switching from 25nm Intel/Micron IMFT chips to 19nm Toshiba modules. These bits of ToshMLC NAND are popular and have a solid reputation, as shown by their usage in the Corsair Neutron GTX and the Seagate 600 SSDs. OCZ also increased the drive’s write endurance to a torrent-loving 50GB a day, up from 20GB on the original Vector.</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><a class="thickbox" href="/files/u152332/vector150_a1_lrg_small_2.jpg"><img src="/files/u152332/vector150_a1_lrg_small_1.jpg" alt="OCZ has updated its flagship Vector with smaller-process NAND and much higher write endurance." title="OCZ Vector 150 240GB SSD" width="620" height="449" /></a></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><strong>OCZ has updated its flagship Vector with smaller-process NAND and much higher write endurance.</strong></p>
<p>Since this is a flagship SSD, it comes with a five-year warranty. It’s available in 120GB, 240GB, and 480GB capacities. You’ll note the rounded-off capacities due to overprovisioning, which is also a change from the original model, which came in 128GB, 256GB, and 512GB capacities. Finally, OCZ has added full-disk 256-bit AES encryption this time around, which is also an upgrade from the OG Vector. The drive uses the same all-metal 7mm chassis as the original model, and includes a 3.5-inch bay adapter as well as a copy of Acronis True Image hard-drive cloning software, so you can easily clone your old drive to your new SSD.</p>
<p>This new Vector 150 uses the same Barefoot 3 drive found in the original Vector, and it’s still able to run with the big boys of the SSD world, of which the Vector is a card-carrying member. To be clear, we consider all the SSDs with a five-year warranty to be “enthusiast” drives, whereas three-year warranty drives are merely “consumer.” That aside, the new Vector is just as impressive as the previous model, meaning it’s one of the fastest SSDs available. In testing, it matched the Samsung 840 Pro and the SanDisk Extreme II in sequential read and write tests, where it is saturating the SATA 6Gb/s interface. It didn’t really care if data was compressed or not, and was able to chug through them regardless. It achieved the second-best score ever in our Sony Vegas 20GB write test and also was top of the charts in PC Mark Vantage, although its score of 71,125 IOPS in Iometer, while respectable, was not near as fast as we’ve seen.</p>
<p>All in all, the pattern is quite clear. This is an SSD that’s very strong across the board. We like the drive’s increased endurance, but would need a year to test it, so we’ll have to take OCZ’s word for now. We love the software bundle too, though its OCZ Toolbox is still rough around the edges. While we do think the drive is a bit too expensive, it’s other- wise top-notch.</p>
<p><strong>$240,</strong> <a href="http://ocz.com/">www.ocz.com</a></p>
http://www.maximumpc.com/ocz_vector_150_240gb_ssd_review#commentsHardwareJanuary issues 2014ReviewssdReviewsSSDWed, 09 Apr 2014 09:29:57 +0000Josh Norem27592 at http://www.maximumpc.comSamsung 840 Evo 1TB Reviewhttp://www.maximumpc.com/samsung_840_evo_1tb_review
<!--paging_filter--><h3>Fastest. SSD. Ever.</h3>
<p>The <a title="samsung 840 pro" href="http://www.maximumpc.com/article/hardware/best_ssd" target="_blank">Samsung 840 Pro</a> landed on our <a title="best of the best" href="http://www.maximumpc.com/best-of-the-best" target="_blank">Best of the Best</a> list when it was launched in December 2012, and it has remained at the top of the SSD pile ever since, thanks to its blistering speed, impeccable pedigree, and superb software. Shortly after the Pro launched, Samsung debuted a non-Pro drive, named simply “840,” that was designed for those who wanted a less expensive drive with a smaller three-year warranty. This month, Samsung is replacing the regular 840 with the <strong>Samsung 840 Evo</strong>, an all-new drive that slots in below the 840 Pro, thanks to its three-year warranty (the Pro’s is five years) and more reasonable pricing. The Evo is also offered in a full range of capacities, from 120GB all the way up to 1TB, making it the first Samsung SSD available at that size and putting the 1TB <a title="crucial m500" href="http://www.maximumpc.com/crucial_m500_480gb_ssd_review" target="_blank">Crucial M500</a> directly in its sights, although the Evo does cost $50 more at $650 MSRP</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><a class="thickbox" href="/files/u152332/ssd840evo_006_dynamic_black_new_0.jpg"><img src="/files/u152332/ssd840evo_006_dynamic_black_new.jpg" alt="The 840 Evo replaces the company’s vanilla 840 drive, but actually threatens the Pro drive. " title="840 Evo" width="620" height="332" /></a></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><strong>The 840 Evo replaces the company’s vanilla 840 drive, but actually threatens the Pro drive. </strong></p>
<p>To create the Evo, Samsung added new 19nm MLC NAND, a new controller named MEX (its previous one was called MDX), and new caching technology it calls TurboWrite. This caching method treats a portion of the drive’s MLC NAND as if it were far pricier and faster SLC NAND for buffered writes, allowing for a significant boost in speeds when utilized. The amount of NAND reserved for this varies according to the drive’s size; on the 1TB review drive we have it’s 36GB, which becomes a 12GB “SLC” buffer—3-bit MLC converted to 1-bit SLC NAND.</p>
<p>In addition to the TurboWrite thing, Samsung has also added a Rapid Mode, enabled in the Samsung Magician software, that uses the host system’s DRAM and CPU for caching purposes. It caches frequently used files in system memory and can dramatically increase read and write speeds. Rapid Mode can be switched on and off in the software, and requires just 50MB of RAM and an 840 Evo SSD to be activated. Samsung says it will eventually bring the caching technology to its 840 Pro drive, but for now it’s exclusive to the Evo.</p>
<p>To test the Evo drive, we attached it to our SSD test bench, installed version 4.2 of the Samsung Magician software, initiated the AS SSD incompressible data benchmark, and went to get a cup of coffee. When we returned, we were lucky not to have been sipping coffee when we saw the numbers because we surely would have done a spit-take. The Evo racked up a score of 855MB/s for reads and 1GB/s for writes, and over 100K IOPS in 4K random writes, as well. As we progressed through our test suite, the Evo laid waste to all the previous drives and became the fastest SSD we have ever tested by a sizable margin, even beating out its big brother, the more expensive 840 Pro. We also tested the drive with Rapid Mode disabled, and it was still extremely fast, making it a supremely competitive SSD that seems to have no weaknesses other than its short three-year warranty.</p>
<p><span style="font-style: italic;">Note: This review was originally featured in the October 2013 issue of the magazine.</span></p>
<p><strong>$650,</strong> <a href="http://www.samsung.com/us/">www.samsung.com </a></p>
http://www.maximumpc.com/samsung_840_evo_1tb_review#comments20131tbfastestHardwareOctober issues 2013ReviewSamsung 840 EVOsolid state drivessdOctober 2013ReviewsSSDWed, 29 Jan 2014 18:55:26 +0000Josh Norem26859 at http://www.maximumpc.comSanDisk Extreme II 480GB SSD Reviewhttp://www.maximumpc.com/sandisk_extreme_ii_480gb_ssd_review
<!--paging_filter--><h3>Second swing at Extreme SSD scores a hit</h3>
<p>The last time we saw the <a title="sandisk extreme ssd" href="http://www.maximumpc.com/sandisk_extreme_ssd_240gb_review" target="_blank">SanDisk Extreme SSD</a> it wasn’t exactly “extreme.” It was a fine drive and all, and we awarded it a “what a nice boy” verdict of 8 because it was decent, but it didn’t blow off our anti-static leashes or anything. The problem was it was a “me, too” SSD, using 24nm toggle NAND and an LSI SandForce SF-2281 controller, which was all the rage in the ancient SSD era of 2012. Times have changed though, and SandForce isn’t the only game in town anymore. SSD manufacturers are now trying to separate themselves from the pack of wannabes by going with different combinations of controllers and NAND flash, and that’s the tactic SanDisk has employed this time around by changing both the NAND flash and the controller, making the <strong>SanDisk Extreme II</strong> SSD an all-new drive.</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><a class="thickbox" href="/files/u152332/extreme_ii_front_hr_small_0.jpg"><img src="/files/u152332/extreme_ii_front_hr_small.jpg" alt="The Extreme II offers relatively extreme performance, but not in all benchmarks. " title="SanDisk Extreme II 480GB SSD" width="620" height="444" /></a></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><strong>The Extreme II offers relatively extreme performance, but not in all benchmarks. </strong></p>
<p>At the heart of the new drive beats Marvell’s third-generation SSD controller, the 88SS9187 “Monet,” released this year and found so far in the <a title="Crucial m500" href="http://www.maximumpc.com/crucial_m500_review" target="_blank">Crucial M500</a> and Plextor M5 Pro SSDs. It offers eight NAND channels and supports up to 1GB of external DDR3 memory (external to the controller, not the SSD). Inside the drive’s belly is new 19nm SanDisk toggle NAND, which is also being used by Corsair and Seagate in their newest SSDs. The NAND is rated for 3,000 program/erase cycles, which works out to roughly 80 terabytes written over the course of the drive’s life. That’s about 40GB of writes per day, which would be considered enough data-writing to warrant an intervention by family and friends. The drive also comes with a five-year warranty— superb—but a fairly bare-bones drive utility that shows you smart values and updates firmware—not superb.</p>
<p>The most unique attribute of the Extreme II is what <a title="sandisk" href="http://www.maximumpc.com/tags/SanDisk" target="_blank">SanDisk</a> calls Tiered Caching, which utilizes both volatile DDR RAM and non-volatile SLC NAND for cache, instead of just DDR like most SSDs on the market (besides SandForce drives, which never used external cache). The secondary SLC NAND cache helps with small writes, which are common in desktop workloads, as they are written to the SLC NAND in groups at high speed before being written to the MLC NAND, resulting in improved performance.</p>
<p>We saw that improvement in our Sony Vegas test, which encodes a 20GB video file to the SSD as fast as it can handle it—the Extreme II completed the test in record time. Its sequential-read and -write speeds were also quite good with compressed and incompressible data, putting it shoulder-to-shoulder with the fastest drives available. It scored surprisingly low in PCMark Vantage, however, and its 32QD IOPS score of 40K-plus was about half what its counterparts could produce, harming the Extreme II’s overall ranking. Though the Extreme II isn’t quite as fast overall as the <a title="samsung 840 pro" href="http://www.maximumpc.com/samsung_840_pro_series_ssd_review" target="_blank">Samsung 840 Pro</a>, it is much less expensive, and it’s slightly faster than the <a title="corsair neutron gtx" href="http://www.maximumpc.com/corsair_neutron_gtx_480gb_review" target="_blank">Corsair Neutron GTX</a>, just not in all tests, making it an overall much-better-than-average drive, but not Kick Ass.</p>
<p><strong>$440,</strong> <a href="http://www.sandisk.com/">www.sandisk.com</a></p>
http://www.maximumpc.com/sandisk_extreme_ii_480gb_ssd_review#comments2013480gbfast storageHardwaremaximum pcReviewSanDisk Extreme IISeptember 2013solid state drivessdReviewsSSDMon, 25 Nov 2013 23:57:50 +0000Josh Norem26698 at http://www.maximumpc.comOCZ Vertex 450 256GB SSD Reviewhttp://www.maximumpc.com/ocz_vertex_450_256gb_ssd_review
<!--paging_filter--><h3>A more affordable Vector has finally arrived</h3>
<p>We were always big fans of <a title="OCZ" href="http://www.maximumpc.com/tags/ocz" target="_blank">OCZ</a>’s Barefoot 2–powered Vertex 4 SSDs. Heck, we even ran two of them in the almighty <a title="Dream Machine 2012" href="http://www.maximumpc.com/article/hardware/dream_machine_2012_future_now" target="_blank">Dream Machine 2012</a>. If that’s not a stamp of approval, we don’t know what is. But the SSD game moves quickly, and you have to keep up or you get left behind, so this month OCZ has put the Vertex 4 out to pasture and ushered in a new drive bearing the moniker <strong>Vertex 450</strong>. Unlike the Vertex 4, which ran a Marvell-based controller with custom OCZ firmware, this bad boy is juicing via OCZ’s very own Barefoot 3 controller, which we first examined in the Kick Ass–caliber <a title="vector SSD" href="http://www.maximumpc.com/ocz_vector_256gb_ssd_review" target="_blank">Vector</a> SSD. The Vector is so fast that it currently sits atop the leaderboard of our SSD benchmarks, right next to the equally Kick Ass <a title="Samsung 840 Pro review" href="http://www.maximumpc.com/512gb_ssd_OCZ_Vector_Samsung_840_Pro" target="_blank">Samsung 840 Pro</a>, and both drives are as good as it gets in the SSD world. But like Samsung, OCZ needs a drive to appeal to the common folk with a bit less cash in their PayPal accounts, so it’s done what Samsung has done with its vanilla 840 drives and released this midrange SSD with a 3-year warranty to compete at a lower price point than the Vector. These are hotly contested waters, though, so the Vertex 450 has its work cut out for it.</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><a class="thickbox" href="/files/u152332/vertex_450_ssd_small_0.jpg"><img src="/files/u152332/vertex_450_ssd_small.jpg" alt="OCZ’s “mainstream” SSD uses its very own in-house Barefoot 3 controller and 20nm MLC NAND flash." title="OCZ Vertex 450 256GB SSD" width="620" height="477" /></a></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><strong>OCZ’s “mainstream” SSD uses its very own in-house Barefoot 3 controller and 20nm MLC NAND flash.</strong></p>
<p>At the heart of this drive is the renowned Barefoot 3 controller, though this is not the same animal you will find in a Vector. This version is called the M10; it has a slightly lower clock speed and the ability to work with the 20nm NAND flash instead of the Vector’s 25nm IMFT MLC NAND. For what it’s worth, the Vertex 4 also used 25nm NAND, and the move to smaller-process flash helps reduce costs and improve capacities, though endurance is affected. Still, OCZ says the drive is good for 20GB every day for three years, which is considered a “heavy” workload. The Barefoot 3 controller also supports 256-bit AES encryption and has Trim support, and promises high performance without resorting to data compression or needing to reserve some space for over-provisioning either, so you get the drive’s full capacity (238GB after formatting). It’s available in the usual sizes: 128GB, 256GB, and 512GB.</p>
<p>In our testing, we found the midrange Vertex 450 to be a totally adequate performer, as it hummed along right at the magical 500MB/s mark for most of its sequential-read speed tests. This is pretty much standard with modern SSDs; the 450 is right where it needs to be in terms of competitive performance. Its 4K random-write performance was middling overall, but placed dead last in this group. It’s “real world” performance, though, as measured by PCMark Vantage was top-of-the-list, with it smokin’ the Samsung 840 and Seagate 600 drives.</p>
<p>Overall, this is a great drive and is fast across the board. But like the <a title="seagate 600" href="http://www.maximumpc.com/article/news/seagates_600_series_solid_state_drive_its_first_ssd_consumers" target="_blank">Seagate 600</a>, it’s too expensive. For this price, you can get an SSD with a 5-year warranty and more performance, like a Samsung 840 Pro.</p>
<p><strong>$235,</strong> <a href="http://ocz.com/">www.ocz.com</a></p>
http://www.maximumpc.com/ocz_vertex_450_256gb_ssd_review#comments2013August 2013256gbaugust 2013Hardwaremaximum pcOCZ Vertex 450 reviewssdReviewsSSDTue, 05 Nov 2013 01:15:52 +0000Josh Norem26499 at http://www.maximumpc.comCrucial M500 480GB SSD Reviewhttp://www.maximumpc.com/crucial_m500_review
<!--paging_filter--><h3>A winning package of low price and high performance</h3>
<p>The <strong><a title="Crucial M500" href="http://www.crucial.com/store/ProductMarketing_m500.aspx" target="_blank">Crucial M500</a></strong> is the company’s third-generation 6Gb/s SSD, and the successor to the often-praised M4 SSD, which we named the “Best Bang for your Buck” SSD back last year due to its well-rounded package of decent performance at a great price. In our estimation, the new drive follows suit, though with much-improved write speeds and massively increased capacities at lower prices, thanks to its move to smaller-process NAND flash. Not only does it come in the standard 120GB, 240GB, and the 480GB version you see before you, but it’s also offered in a pants-tightening 1TB version at just $600, making it the only truly affordable 1TB SSD ever offered. Since the terabyte drive was not available at press time, we’re taking a look at the 480GB version, which sports the exact same specs as its big brother.</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><a class="thickbox" href="/files/u152332/m500_2-5_ssd_small_0.jpg"><img src="/files/u152332/m500_2-5_ssd_small.jpg" alt="The M500 is the first SSD to offer a relatively affordable 1TB option. Who needs kidneys, anyway?" title="Crucial M500 480GB SSD" width="620" height="438" /></a></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><strong>The M500 is the first SSD to offer a relatively affordable 1TB option. Who needs kidneys, anyway?</strong></p>
<p>The drive itself comes in a shiny 7mm silver enclosure, so it fits into some thinner notebooks. A 9.5mm spacer is included, but not a 3.5-inch adapter, nor is there any software in the box or online aside from a firmware updating tool, which is disappointing. Inside the M500’s shell we find that Crucial has moved from 25nm NAND to 20nm MLC NAND flash. Smaller-process NAND offers benefits such as lower power consumption and increased capacities, but also reduces the NAND’s life span somewhat. Still, Crucial offers the drive with a 3-year warranty and says the drive can handle 40GB of data written to it every day for five years, so the drive’s NAND should last long enough even for hardcore data-mongers. Crucial is still using a Marvell controller, though it’s an updated version of the one used on the M4, and, of course, it has updated firmware.</p>
<p>In testing, we saw the M500 post very respectable scores across the board, though none were the fastest we’ve seen, nor would we expect them to be at this price. The biggest improvement we see over the M4 is in write speeds, which have gone from 193MB/s in CrystalDiskMark to 422MB/s, and that difference shows in the AS SSD compressed-data test as well, showing almost a doubling of speed from the M500. The ATTO test mirrors our other results, showing the drive capable of around 500MB/s read speeds and 422MB/s write speeds, which is superb for a “value” drive. Its Iometer score of 83,354 IOPS is also top-of-its-class as well, as is its PCMark Vantage HDD test score of 71,619. Oddly, its Sony Vegas score is unchanged from the M4, so it’s possible the Marvell controller still has a tough time with data-compression duties when writing huge files, 20GB in our scenario.</p>
<p>Overall, the M500 shows just how far value drives have progressed, since this drive is about as fast as the fastest SSDs available a year ago. When compared to its most direct competitor—the Samsung 840 500GB—the two are pretty evenly matched, though the Crucial drive was a little faster in more tests. However, the Samsung drive costs about $40 less, has the same warranty, and better software support, making it a nail-biter between them.</p>
<p><strong>$400,</strong> <a href="http://www.crucial.com/">www.crucial.com</a></p>
http://www.maximumpc.com/crucial_m500_review#commentsJuly 20132013480gbCrucial M500fast hard driveHardwaremaximum pcReviewsolid state drivessdstorageReviewsSSDMon, 14 Oct 2013 20:15:15 +0000Josh Norem26328 at http://www.maximumpc.comEverything You Wanted to Know About SSDshttp://www.maximumpc.com/SSD_2013
<!--paging_filter--><h3>You’ve got SSD questions, we’ve got SSD answers. It’s time for a crash course in solid-state drive technology</h3>
<p>Solid-state drives (<strong><a title="SSD" href="http://www.maximumpc.com/tags/ssd" target="_blank">SSD</a></strong>) are taking the PC world by storm with their silent operation, blazing speeds, and ever-sinking prices, and yet you're hesitant to buy one. Maybe you're afraid of SSDs, or you don't think you know enough to make an educated purchase, or maybe a bad SSD controller took all your data down to Chinatown. Regardless of the reason for your trepidation, every horsepower junkie should be getting in on the SSD action, and to do that you need a little bit of cash and a whole lot of knowledge. In this article, we will attempt to answer all of your SSD-related questions. We'll walk you through all the reasons why you need an SSD first, then break down the terminology so you can talk like an SSD badass at the next LAN party, then show you the parts of an SSD so you know how it all fits together, and we'll wrap it up with a discussion of the software you'll need to monitor and optimize your drive. Though SSDs might seem complicated with their 24nm synchronous MLC Toggle NAND flash and their AHCI-enabled SATA 6Gb/s IOPS gobbledygook, you're about to find out they are not as scary as you thought they were.</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><img src="/files/u154082/ssd.png" alt="SSD" title="SSD" width="620" height="488" /></p>
<h3>What Is an SSD and Why Should You Care?</h3>
<p><strong>Demonic speed and immunity to tumbles are part of the story</strong></p>
<p>Let's start with the basics. An SSD is a solid-state drive, meaning it has no moving parts. It's basically a thin slice of NAND flash memory that’s similar to what you find in a USB thumb drive, though instead of being jammed into a finger-size stick it’s stuffed inside a 2.5-inch enclosure with a SATA interface. As you have probably heard, SSDs are several orders of magnitude faster than mechanical hard drives for one simple reason: Instead of waiting for the hard drive platters to spin under the read/write heads, you are pulling data from NAND flash memory, so access times are nearly instant. SSDs are so fast that some of them are currently able to completely saturate today’s SATA spec, pumping roughly 550MB/s of data through the SATA 6Gb/s interface, whereas the fastest 7,200rpm hard drive would be lucky to hit 150MB/s across the platter. Other benefits of SSDs are that they generate no noise since there are no moving parts, which also lets them produce much less heat. They can still get a little warm, but don't require active cooling like a hard drive does. And since they have no moving parts, you're free to wedge one into your laptop and toss it around like the bouquet at a wedding, though we don't recommend doing that. To summarize, SSDs offer tremendous speed, emit no noise, give off very little heat, and fit in the space the size of a few credit cards. What's not to love?</p>
<h4>What’s Not to Love</h4>
<p>Here's the downside: SSDs are expensive, and there's also the chance that whatever drive you select might die on you one day. Now, we know that doesn't sound good, but there are some silver linings here. The first is that prices are dropping rapidly, so much so that right now 128GB drives are hovering around $100, so that's less than the magical $1-per-gigabyte price bar we’ve set for an OK deal. Drives with capacities of 256GB are even less expensive, averaging around $160. Sadly, 512GB drives are still a smidge spendy, and 1TB drives, well, they don't even really exist for mere mortals. SSD prices will continue to fall, though, as adoption rates increase, so any financial barrier to entry you might fear will soon be nonexistent.</p>
<p>The second point is much more concerning to you, as nobody enjoys seeing their data go bye-bye. Let's just get this out of the way: Many people have had their SSDs fail. We've had our own personal SSDs fail in our home machines, and seen units here die an untimely death in the Lab, in seemingly random fashion. What needs to be made clear, though, is the fact that in all of these cases it was the controller that gave out, not the NAND flash itself. Anyone who tells you they have reached the end of the life cycle for NAND flash is either high, lying, or from the Internet, so don't believe them. It's not the flash that typically dies, but the controllers, and here's the good news: Things are improving massively on this front. In fact, we've yet to see a late-model SSD die, and chalk up the earlier failures to the fact that it was simply new technology, not yet battle-tested on the front lines. You might recall several high-profile SSD recalls, as well, which didn't help their status as a fledgling technology. The simple truth is that those days are mostly behind us, and as controller and firmware technology has matured, reliability has improved greatly, so we have zero problems recommending any late-model SSD but, as always, you should back up your data regardless of the storage medium you have in place.</p>
<h4>The Evolution of SSD Form Factors</h4>
<p><img src="/files/u154082/ssd_small.jpg" alt="ssd small" title="ssd small" width="200" height="134" style="float: right;" />When SSDs first burst onto the scene, they came in unwieldy 3.5-inch enclosures the size of hard drives. These SSDs were blazing-fast at the time, and ungodly expensive. We're talking $1,000 for 64GB, but back then it was all that we had, so we paid it. SSDs eventually migrated to the 2.5-inch enclosures that we use now, and are also offered in the teeny, tiny mSATA form factor for notebooks, as well. If this downsizing trend continues, we expect future SSDs to be microscipic.</p>
<h3>Anatomy of an SSD</h3>
<p style="text-align: center;"><a class="thickbox" href="/files/u152332/main_image_2__0.jpg"><img src="/files/u152332/main_image_2_.jpg" width="500" height="663" /></a></p>
<h4>1. Outer Shell</h4>
<p>This shell could be plastic or metal, and helps absorb some of the heat from the flash memory inside. A 7mm shell allows an SSD to be used in an Ultrabook, though some employ the thicker 9mm form factor. Unlike with a mechanical hard drive, you could remove this cover and run an SSD commando and it would not make much difference to the drive, though we don't recommend it.</p>
<h4>2. NAND Flash</h4>
<p>These are the memory chips that hold your data. They are typically clustered in groups of chips covering both sides of the PCB. Most SSDs you will see use either MLC or TLC NAND, though if this was an enterprise-level model it might use SLC NAND flash. MLC flash wears down twice as fast as SLC flash, and TLC wears down quicker than MLC, but you will still get many years of usage from MLC or TLC.</p>
<h4>3. DRAM Buffer</h4>
<p>Every SSD also includes a bit of DRAM used for buffering purposes. Like cache on a hard drive, data is stored here temporarily before it's written to the device. Wear-leveling data is also placed into the cache while the drive is running. SandForce SSDs are the only models that do not use external DRAM.</p>
<h4>4. Power and DATA Interface</h4>
<p>Modern SSDs ship with SATA 6Gb/s interfaces that allow for roughly 550MB/s read and write speeds, though this will change soon since today's drives are saturating the bus. The next-gen interface, called SATA Express, will utilize PCI Express lanes instead, allowing us to eventually hit up to 16Gb/s of throughput. Yes, we are salivating.</p>
<h4>5. Controller</h4>
<p>The controller runs the show, usually with a multicore processor. This is what separates one SSD from another, for the most part, though custom firmware designed by the drive manufacturer is also a factor. Controllers communicate with NAND over parallel channels, compress and uncompress data, and keep the drive optimized with garbage collection.</p>
<p><em>Click the next page to learn about solid-state drive terminology and the software side of SSDs.</em></p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<hr />
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<h3>Solid-State Terminology</h3>
<p><strong>Or how to look like you know what you’re talking about </strong></p>
<h4>NAND Flash</h4>
<p>NAND flash is a type of nonvolatile flash memory that stands for "Not And," which is a reference to the type of logic gate it uses. This is different from NOR flash, which is used in environments where the same program is run over and over again. NAND memory is popular due to its speed, durability, and relatively low cost compared to DRAM, and is commonly found in storage devices such as USB keys, tablets, cell phones, and of course, SSDs. Though there are various types of NAND flash, all SSDs on the market currently use this type of memory.</p>
<h4>Controller</h4>
<p>This is the brains of the SSD and what truly separates one drive from another, as they mostly use very similar NAND flash. Typical controllers today use multiple cores for running the drive, performing data compression, and executing drive optimizations. Before you make any purchasing decisions about an SSD, find out which controller it uses, as some controllers have a checkered history. Currently only <a title="maximum pc samsung" href="http://www.maximumpc.com/tags/Samsung" target="_blank">Samsung</a> and <a title="ocz" href="http://www.maximumpc.com/tags/OCZ" target="_blank">OCZ</a> have controllers that were designed and manufactured in-house, which theoretically gives them an advantage, while <a title="intel" href="http://www.maximumpc.com/tags/Intel_0" target="_blank">Intel</a> uses SandForce, <a title="corsair" href="http://www.maximumpc.com/tags/Corsair" target="_blank">Corsair</a> uses Link A Media, and <a href="http://www.maximumpc.com/tags/Crucial">Crucial </a>uses a Marvell controller.</p>
<h4>MLC NAND</h4>
<p>This is the most common type of NAND flash used in SSDs today, and it stands for “multi-level cell” memory. Its much more expensive counterpart is SLC, or “single-level cell” memory. In SLC, only one state can be maintained per cell, making it good for one bit of data. In MLC, however, up to four states can be stored per cell, allowing it to hold two bits of data. The proximity of the two states creates the possibility for more errors, though, which is why SLC is so expensive, and rare. Flash memory can only sustain a finite number of read/write operations but modern day SSDs perform wear-leveling in order to allow them to survive for a decade or longer depending on drive activity levels.</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><a class="thickbox" href="/files/u152332/circuit_small_0.jpg"><img src="/files/u152332/circuit_small.jpg" title="MLCNAND" width="620" height="288" /></a></p>
<h4 style="text-align: left;">SLC NAND</h4>
<p style="text-align: left;">This is the good stuff. SLC NAND is very expensive and is only found in enterprise-level storage products due to its cost. It stores one data state per cell, and since there are no other data states nearby, it is extremely accurate and long-lasting. At press time a 256GB SLC SSD costs $2,600, so you won't be seeing them in your home machine any time soon.</p>
<h4 style="text-align: left;">Trim</h4>
<p style="text-align: left;">Trim is something you'll hear about a lot with SSDs, because it performs the crucial function of helping the SSD optimize itself when it is idle, so not having Trim support is bad, and it needs to be in both the drive and your OS. Essentially, the Trim command is sent from the OS to the drive's controller to tell it which bits of data can be safely deleted, so without Trim the drive could theoretically just fill up and degrade. Since NAND cells cannot be overwritten, they must be erased before new data is written to them. The command also lets the controller reorganize data, similar to defragmenting a hard drive. Trim is supported in Windows 7 and 8, and in all modern SSDs.</p>
<h4 style="text-align: left;">Asynchronous vs. Synchronous Flash</h4>
<p style="text-align: left;">You'll see this in an SSD's specs, and the bottom line is that asynchronous flash is not as fast or expensive as synchronous flash, so it's not uncommon to see it in value drives, while synchronous flash is used in high-performance drives. Synchronous flash processes data roughly twice as fast as asynchronous, on both ends of the clock cycle, so you get two outputs per cycle, while asynchronous is not synced to the clock speed of the processor, so you can expect lower performance.</p>
<h4 style="text-align: left;">IOPS</h4>
<p style="text-align: left;">This spec shows how many operations per second the drive is capable of performing. This differs from read/write speeds in that it's not measuring the speed of the writes or reads, but the number of them. This is typically used in situations where heavy random workloads are needed, simply because, in our opinion, it sounds better to say 85,000 IOPS than 30MB/s.</p>
<h4 style="text-align: left;">Sequential Read/Write Speed</h4>
<p style="text-align: left;">This is how fast a drive can read and write contiguous data, sort of like an elephant inhaling a row of peanuts. This is often used as a metric for benchmarks because it measures "straight-line speeds" but is not indicative of real-world performance, as data is rarely written or read in this fashion.</p>
<h4 style="text-align: left;">Secure Erase</h4>
<p>Old blocks of data on an SSD have to be erased before new blocks can be written to it, which takes time, so the fastest an SSD will ever be is the moment it comes out of the box and is totally empty. Unfortunately, even if you deleted everything on the drive, the data is still there, so it will still need to be erased if you want to write over it (Trim does this to some extent but not completely). The only way to totally wipe a drive of all its contents is a Secure Erase, which completely deletes all data on a drive. This is the most common way to get an SSD back to its fastest possible state, and is accomplished via software included with your drive.</p>
<p><em>See the next page to read about the downside of using Trim and to learn about different SSD software.</em></p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<hr />
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<h3 style="text-align: left;">The Downside of Using Trim</h3>
<p style="text-align: left;">The Trim command has been made into something of a living legend in Windows 7 and 8, because it is so crucial to keeping an SSD optimized via garbage collection and the deletion of data that is no longer needed. Since SSDs require a data block to be erased before it can be written to, it’s important to have that deletion occur before the data needs to be written, otherwise the whole process gets bogged down with multiple operations instead of just a simple write command.</p>
<p style="text-align: left;">There’s a big downside to keeping your drive optimized, though, which HDD users don’t have to contend with: If you accidentally delete a file and then try to undelete it via recovery software such as <a title="file scavenger" href="http://www.quetek.com/prod02.htm" target="_blank">File Scavenger </a>you may be out of luck. That’s because Trim, or even the drive’s own firmware, may have already deleted the data forever. More disturbing is that Trim can be executed at any time—its schedule isn’t transparent to the user—so 10 minutes after you’ve deleted the file, it might already have been purged.</p>
<p style="text-align: left;">If you are a serial file-bungler and find yourself in constant need of file recovery, consider disabling Trim to buy you a little more time to recover inadvertently deleted data (at the cost of overall performance). Windows 7 users should also consider leaving system protection on, which will, on occasion, make copies of files. Windows 8 users should enable the File History feature that makes real-time backups of files on a secondary drive for you.</p>
<h3 style="text-align: left;">The Software Side</h3>
<p style="text-align: left;"><strong>SSD utilities can make all the difference to your drive’s overall functionality</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: left;">Though most people install an SSD and never give it a second thought, free software makes it possible to monitor, optimize, and tweak a drive’s performance. Samsung, Intel, and OCZ SSDs come bundled with free utilities, and you can use the free CrystalDiskInfo (<a href="http://crystalmark.info/software/CrystalDiskInfo/index-e.html">http://bit.ly/UKzt0</a>) with any SSD on the market. Here’s a quick peek at what each one offers.</p>
<h4 style="text-align: left;"><a title="samsung ssd magician" href="http://www.techspot.com/downloads/5345-samsung-ssd-magician.html" target="_blank">Samsung SSD Magician 4.0</a></h4>
<p style="text-align: left;">It’s hard to believe, but not only does Samsung make arguably the best SSDs available right now, but it also makes the best SSD software, as well. Right on the home screen you can see how much data has been written to the NAND, its status, your interface speed, and more. If your OS doesn’t support Trim, you can click “performance optimization” to Trim the drive manually. You can also update the firmware, adjust over-provisioning space, and more. Samsung regularly updates its software, too, making the choice to invest in a Samsung SSD that much easier.</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><a class="thickbox" href="/files/u152332/samsung_small_0.jpg"><img src="/files/u152332/samsung_small.jpg" title="Samsung SSD Magician 4.0" width="620" height="325" /></a></p>
<h4 style="text-align: left;"><a title="Intel SSD toolbox" href="https://downloadcenter.intel.com/Detail_Desc.aspx?DwnldID=18455" target="_blank">Intel SSD Toolbox</a></h4>
<p style="text-align: left;">Intel’s toolbox software is easy to use, full of information, and tells you right on the home screen what the drive’s health status is at the moment. Diving deeper into the menus will let you update the drive’s firmware, perform a secure erase, run diagnostic scans on the drive, run the Trim command, and it will show you how to fully optimize the drive with your OS. If you’re super-nerdy you can also choose to examine the drive’s SMART data and details, but the whole point of the simple interface is to show you all that data in an easy-to-digest fashion. Still, it’s all there if you really want to see it.</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><a class="thickbox" href="/files/u152332/intel_small_1.jpg"><img src="/files/u152332/intel_small.jpg" title="Intel SSD Toolbox" width="620" height="449" /></a></p>
<h4 style="text-align: left;"><a title="OCZ toolbox" href="http://ocz.com/consumer/download/firmware" target="_blank">OCZ Toolbox v4.3</a></h4>
<p style="text-align: left;">OCZ’s free Toolbox software is basically the equivalent of a three-blade Swiss Army knife, in that it only lets you do a few things with your SSD. It’s actually strange that OCZ would spend time and money to develop a software tool, then populate it with so few options, but since it’s free software we’re not complaining too much. The tool gives you the ability to check for firmware updates and apply them, and perform a secure erase of the drive; it will also spit out the drive’s SMART data in the most unfriendly manner we’ve ever seen, so have fun translating it. This utility is helpful for updating your drive’s firmware but not much else.</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><a class="thickbox" href="/files/u152332/ocz_toolbox_small_0.jpg"><img src="/files/u152332/ocz_toolbox_small.jpg" title="OCZ Toolbox v4.3" width="620" height="364" /></a></p>
<h4 style="text-align: left;"><a title="crystaldiskinfo" href="http://download.cnet.com/CrystalDiskInfo/3000-2086_4-10832082.html" target="_blank">CrystalDiskInfo 5.4.2</a></h4>
<p>This is a free utility that should be able to read the SMART data from any SSD and give you an indication as to the drive’s health, information about its activity, and more. One field to pay attention to is Total NAND Writes, as that will give you an indication of how much has been written to the drive if you like to keep tabs on those things. It also displays the current firmware version, SATA transfer mode, which features are enabled, and all the SMART data, as well.</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><a class="thickbox" href="/files/u152332/crystal_small_0.jpg"><img src="/files/u152332/crystal_small.jpg" title="CrystalDiskInfo 5.4.2" width="620" height="373" /></a></p>
http://www.maximumpc.com/SSD_2013#commentsJune 20132013Hard DriveHDDintel ssdoczSamsung SSDsolid state drivessdSSDFeaturesFri, 16 Aug 2013 22:01:23 +0000Josh Norem26124 at http://www.maximumpc.com512GB SSD Fight: OCZ Vector 512GB vs Samsung 840 Pro 512GBhttp://www.maximumpc.com/512gb_ssd_OCZ_Vector_Samsung_840_Pro
<!--paging_filter--><h3>The ultimate battle for solid-state supremacy</h3>
<p>The Samsung 840 Pro was our top SSD until the OCZ Vector came along several months later and was able to run neck-and-neck with the Sammy through our benchmark gauntlet. As it currently stands, the 256GB versions of these drives both wear a 9/Kick Ass bandolier around their midsections, but there’s still another contest that has yet to be decided. So this month, we gathered the 512GB versions of both drives and set them loose in the blood-splattered arena known as the Lab.</p>
<h4>OCZ Vector 512GB</h4>
<p>The <strong><a title="ocz" href="http://www.maximumpc.com/tags/OCZ" target="_blank">OCZ</a> Vector</strong> surprised all of us with its speed and consistency when we first tested it in November of last year. Though it didn’t quite eclipse the overall performance of the <strong><a title="samsung" href="http://www.maximumpc.com/tags/Samsung" target="_blank">Samsung</a> 840 Pro</strong>, it was an extremely close fight, which was a significant achievement for OCZ given Samsung’s prodigious size and resources and OCZ’s comparatively tiny stature.</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><a class="thickbox" href="/files/u152332/ocz-vector-series-ssd_small_0.jpg"><img src="/files/u152332/ocz-vector-series-ssd_small.jpg" alt="The OCZ Vector is so close to the Samsung 840 Pro that in the real world it’s mostly a tie." title="OCZ Vector 512GB" width="620" height="374" /></a></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><strong>The OCZ Vector is so close to the Samsung 840 Pro that in the real world it’s mostly a tie.</strong></p>
<p>Unlike OCZ’s Vertex 4 drive, which used the Indilinx Everest 2 controller with Marvell silicon and OCZ and Indilinx firmware, the Vector uses a new controller named Barefoot 3 that is 100 percent OCZ’s creation, both in terms of silicon and firmware. Controller aside, the Vector uses the same zippy 25nm IMTF MLC NAND found in the Vertex 4 but with all-new firmware. The 512GB Vector sports a slice-of-turkey-thin 7mm metal chassis with a pretty blue and black motif, and like all modern SSDs it rides the SATA 6Gb/s interface. The complete package includes an OCZ sticker, a 3.5-inch bay adapter, and a lengthy 5-year warranty. OCZ also makes its OCZ Toolbox software available for download; we'll cover that a bit more down below.</p>
<p>During testing, the 512GB Vector delivered the same scintillating performance we saw from the 256GB version, again allowing it to run nose-to-nose with the Samsung 840 Pro all the way around our test track. Though it took top honors in two of our nine tests, it was beaten by the Samsung 840 Pro in the other seven, making the Samsung drive the overall winner in what was a very close contest. In our sequential speed tests, both drives were pushing right around 500MB/s in both directions, which is running right up to the edge of the SATA 6Gb/s interface, so you’d be hard-pressed to find anything faster using current technology. In our 4K random-write test with a 32- command queue, both drives topped 80,000 IOPS but the Vector came up a bit short compared to the 840 Pro, yet tied with the 480GB Corsair Neutron GTX. In our new Sony Vegas test, the SSDs are told to write a humongous 200GB AVI file, so it’s a test of straight-line speed, and in this test the Vector placed respectably but was again outpaced by the 840 Pro by a very close 18 seconds.</p>
<p>Overall, it was a great showing by the Vector but it clearly has as small speed disadvantage. The other area that’s lacking is its OCZ Toolbox software, which covers the basics like secure erase and firmware updates, but is ugly and lacks many of the features of Samsung’s software, making it one more area where OCZ needs to catch up. The Vector is still a fantastic SSD, but as a comprehensive package it’s not quite able to overcome the 840 Pro’s speed, software, and slight price advantage.</p>
<div class="lowdown">
<div class="module orange-module article-module verdict-block"><span class="module-name-header" style="font-size: 14px; border-bottom: 1px solid #000;">OCZ Vector 512GB</span><br />
<div class="module-content" style="margin-top: -20px;">
<div class="module-text full">
<div class="product-verdict">
<div class="positive"><span class="header">SSD Speeds<br /></span>
<p>Fast in every test; 5-year warranty; looks snazzy.</p>
</div>
<div class="negative"><span class="header">SSD Prices<br /></span>
<p>Not quite as fast as the Samsung; software could be improved.</p>
</div>
<div class="verdict"><img src="/sites/maximumpc.com/themes/maximumpc/i/mxpc_9.jpg" alt="score:9" title="score:9" width="210" height="80" /></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p><strong>$540, <a href="http://www.ocztechnology.com " target="_blank">www.ocztechnology.com</a></strong></p>
<h4>Samsung 840 Pro 512GB</h4>
<p>When the all-new Samsung 840 Pro debuted a few months back, we were excited to see if Samsung could maintain its mojo—after all, the 830 Series was at the time our <a title="best of the best maximum pc" href="http://www.maximumpc.com/best-of-the-best" target="_blank">Best of the Best</a> in the SSD category. We need not have worried about mojo depletion, as the 840 Pro was not just faster than the 830 Series drives, it was faster than any other SSD we had tested at that time, and in its maiden voyage in the Lab it broke seven out of nine benchmark records. This month, the 512GB version has arrived to preserve the brand’s honor. We even heard it whisper to the Vector, “Prepare to die” when the two drives met on the test bench.</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><a class="thickbox" href="/files/u152332/8402_small_0.jpg"><img src="/files/u152332/8402_small.jpg" alt="Samsung's 840 Pro is about as fast as we can expect an SSD to be, given current technology." title="Samsung 840 Pro 512GB" width="620" height="350" /></a></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><strong>Samsung's 840 Pro is about as fast as we can expect an SSD to be, given current technology.</strong></p>
<p>Like its 256GB stable mate, the 512GB Sammy Pro (476GB formatted) sports 21nm Toshiba MLC Toggle NAND instead of the less-expensive TLC NAND found in the non-Pro version of the drive. The drive comes with a 5-year warranty but does not ship with a 3.5-inch bay adapter, as it’s clearly being marketed toward mobile users looking for a speed bump rather than desktop power-junkies like us. The Pro includes Samsung’s Magician software, data migration software, and an aesthetic that matches the non-Pro series, which we think is a shame.</p>
<p>During testing, the 840 Pro demonstrated why it’s on our Best of the Best list with a commanding performance. Even though it had the Vector and the Corsair Neutron GTX 480GB breathing down its SATA connector the whole time, it was still able to outpace both of them comfortably in the majority of our tests. Most interesting is the fact that the 840 Pro was able to beat the other drives in both sequential and random-write tests, which is impressive. Its most notable win was in Iometer, where the drive hit almost 90K IOPS, which is ridiculously fast. The only test where the 840 Pro lost to the Vector was in 4K incompressible write requests via AS SSD, which is even more of a torture test than Iometer, but the Samsung’s score of 16,984 IOPS is still second-fastest for its class.</p>
<p>Finally, there’s the SSD Magician software that comes with the drive, which is head-and-shoulders better than any other SSD software on the market. It shows you more information than you’d ever hope to find, like how much data has been written to the drive, AHCI status, and more.</p>
<div class="lowdown">
<div class="module orange-module article-module verdict-block"><span class="module-name-header" style="font-size: 14px; border-bottom: 1px solid #000;">Samsung 840 Pro 512GB</span><br />
<div class="module-content" style="margin-top: -20px;">
<div class="module-text full">
<div class="product-verdict">
<div class="positive"><span class="header">David<br /></span>
<p>Fastest SSD available; superb software package; 5-year warranty.</p>
</div>
<div class="negative"><span class="header">Sammy<br /></span>
<p>Boring looks; no 3.5-inch bay adapter.</p>
</div>
<div class="verdict"><img src="/sites/maximumpc.com/themes/maximumpc/i/mxpc_9ka.jpg" alt="score:9ka" title="score:9ka" width="210" height="80" /></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p><strong>$520, <a href="http://www.samsung.com " target="_blank">www.samsung.com</a></strong></p>
<div class="module orange-module article-module">
<div class="module orange-module article-module"><span class="module-name">Benchmarks</span><br />
<div class="module-content">
<div class="module-text full">
<div class="spec-table orange">
<table style="width: 620px; height: 265px;" border="0">
<thead> </thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td><strong>OCZ Vector</strong></td>
<td><strong>Samsung 840 Pro</strong> </td>
<td>Corsair Neutron GTX</td>
<td>Samsung 840</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="item">Controller</td>
<td class="item-dark">Barefoot 3</td>
<td>Samsung MDX</td>
<td>LAMD</td>
<td>MDX</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Capacity</td>
<td>512GB</td>
<td>512GB</td>
<td>480GB</td>
<td>500GB</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="item">CrystalDiskMark</td>
<td class="item-dark"></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Avg. Sustained Read (MB/s)</td>
<td>502</td>
<td><strong>534</strong></td>
<td>441</td>
<td>464</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Avg. Sustained Write (MB/s)</td>
<td>499</td>
<td><strong>514</strong></td>
<td>478</td>
<td>333</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>AS SSD</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>4KB Read (IOPS)</td>
<td>7,129</td>
<td><strong>8,064</strong></td>
<td>6,762</td>
<td>6,921</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>4KB Write (IOPS)</td>
<td><strong>18,506</strong></td>
<td>16,984</td>
<td>16,475</td>
<td>15,955</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>ATTO</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>64KB File Read (MB/s)</td>
<td>511</td>
<td><strong>524</strong></td>
<td>345</td>
<td>335</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>64KB File Write (MB/s)</td>
<td>480</td>
<td>497</td>
<td>478</td>
<td><strong>531</strong></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Iometer</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>4KB Random Write 32QD (IOPS)</td>
<td>83,531</td>
<td><strong>89,297</strong></td>
<td>85,375</td>
<td>70,654</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>PCMark Vantage x64</td>
<td><strong>75,863 </strong></td>
<td>75,205</td>
<td>67,426</td>
<td>52,557</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Sony Vegas Pro 9 Write (sec)</td>
<td>314</td>
<td>294</td>
<td><strong>286</strong></td>
<td>327</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p><em>Best scores are bolded. All tests were run on an Intel Core i5 3470 test bench with 8GB of RAM, an Intel 520 Series SSD, Gigabyte Z77X-UP4 motherboard, and a Cooler Master 450W PSU.<br /></em></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
http://www.maximumpc.com/512gb_ssd_OCZ_Vector_Samsung_840_Pro#commentsMay 20132013512gbfastfeatureHard DriveHardwareHardwaremaximum pcOCZ Vectorsamsung 840 prospeedssdstorageReviewsSSDFeaturesTue, 30 Jul 2013 21:24:25 +0000Josh Norem25923 at http://www.maximumpc.comMidrange SSD Head-to-Headhttp://www.maximumpc.com/article/features/midrange_ssd_2013
<!--paging_filter--><h3>Samsung and Corsair SSDs go at it once again</h3>
<p>Several months ago, the supreme high-end SSDs from <a title="corsair" href="http://www.maximumpc.com/tags/Corsair" target="_blank">Corsair</a> and <a title="samsung" href="http://www.maximumpc.com/tags/Samsung" target="_blank">Samsung</a> faced off in the Octagon known as the top of our desk area that holds drives being tested. In that <a title="best SSD" href="http://www.maximumpc.com/article/hardware/best_ssd" target="_blank">blood-curdling battle</a> (in which neither drive moved nor made a sound), the <a title="840 pro" href="http://www.maximumpc.com/article/%5Bprimary-term%5D/samsung_840_pro_series_ssd_review" target="_blank">Samsung 840 Pro</a> was victorious, vanquishing its opponent by a slim margin in a contest where zero trash talk was delivered by either storage device. This month, round two commences as the companies’ value-conscious SSDs clash like cars in a demolition derby by sitting quietly on a test bench while we perform benchmarks upon them. Neither of these drives is as fast as their top-tier brethren, but they are priced accordingly, and both are a damned-good value.</p>
<h4>Corsair Neutron Series 240GB</h4>
<p>The <strong>Corsair Neutron</strong> is a slightly detuned version of the company’s Kick Ass award–winning Neutron GTX SSD. It shares the GTX’s all-new Link A Media Device (LAMD) controller, the same slim 7mm form factor, and the same five-year warranty, which is as good as they get these days. The biggest difference between the two drives is the type of NAND flash they use, with the expensive GTX drive boasting the swanky Toshiba 24nm Toggle NAND, and the less expensive Neutron using 25nm ONFI MLC NAND from Micron, which helps keep the drive’s price in check. According to the drive's spec charts, the ONFI NAND is significantly slower than the Toggle NAND from Toshiba for write operations, but the two are evenly matched when it comes to read speeds. The GTX also has a slight edge when it comes to 4K random-write IOPS.</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><a class="thickbox" href="/files/u152332/ssd_ntrn_small_2.jpg"><img src="/files/u152332/ssd_ntrn_small_1.jpg" alt="Corsair’s Neutron uses the LAMD controller found in the Neutron GTX, but goes with the less-costly Micron NAND." title="Corsair Neutron Series 240GB" width="620" height="517" /></a></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><strong>Corsair’s Neutron uses the LAMD controller found in the Neutron GTX, but goes with the less-costly Micron NAND.</strong></p>
<p>We tested the 240GB version of the drive, which is 223GB after being formatted. The extra 16GB of space you can’t see or access is used for over-provisioning. The drive comes with a SATA 6Gb/s connector, it supports the Trim command in Windows 7, and is also available in a 120GB capacity. Its bundle includes a 3.5-inch bay adapter but no software.</p>
<p>To test the drive, we ran it through our gauntlet of benchmarks and compared it with the Samsung 840 as well as other drives at its price point. On the whole, the Neutron performed extremely well for a midrange drive, though it didn’t top every category of testing. In our top-speed test of sequential reads, it delivered impressive 454MB/s and 363MB/s read and write speeds, respectively, placing it just behind the Samsung in read speeds, and making it the second-fastest in write speeds, just behind the <a title="OCZ vertex 4" href="http://www.maximumpc.com/article/%5Bprimary-term%5D/ocz_vertex_4_256gb_review" target="_blank">OCZ Vertex 4</a>.</p>
<p>When it comes to incompressible data such as MP3s and video, the Neutron performed respectably in our AS SSD benchmark, again losing slightly to the Vertex 4 but outpacing the Samsung. Corsair claims the drive shines in tests such as this, and though its score isn't top of the charts, it's in line with Corsair's marketing, as its read speeds are stellar, even if its write speeds are a bit slower than the competition.</p>
<p>In our ATTO 64K sequential-read and -write test with a four-command queue, the Neutron was about on par with the Vertex 4 in read speeds but back-of-the-pack in write performance by a small margin. Where the Neutron really shines is in high I/O scenarios such as our Iometer test, which pummels the drive silently via software with a queue of 32 4K random write requests. In this test we saw the Neutron deliver a beatdown on every other drive we tested, and its score of 80,466 IOPS puts it in the same league as its much more expensive top-tier competitors. It also threw down the gauntlet (despite not having arms) in our real-world <a title="pcmark vantage" href="http://www.futuremark.com/benchmarks/pcmark-vantage/" target="_blank">PCMark Vantage</a> test, racking up a surprising score of 70,030, which is impressive for a drive of this price range. In our final test of <a title="premiere pro" href="http://www.adobe.com/products/premiere.html" target="_blank">Premiere Pro</a>, the Neutron hung with its compatriots, so there's nothing special to report on that front.</p>
<p>All in all, the Neutron impressed us with its speed, warranty, and price point. It's not quite as inexpensive as the Intel 335 or the Samsung 840, but it's faster. When compared to the Vertex 4, though, it loses in most tests by a healthy margin even though the two are priced the same. That makes it a nail-biter since both drives have a five-year warranty and the Vertex 4 is a little long in the tooth. But the numbers don't lie—the OCZ drive is faster.</p>
<div class="verdict"><img src="/sites/maximumpc.com/themes/maximumpc/i/mxpc_9.jpg" alt="score:9" title="score:9" width="250" height="80" /></div>
<p><strong>$225, <a href="http://www.corsair.com/us/" target="_blank">www.corsair.com</a></strong></p>
<p><strong><em>Click the next page for the Samsung 840 Series SSD review.</em></strong></p>
<p><strong>&nbsp;</strong></p>
<hr />
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<h4>Samsung 840 Series 250GB</h4>
<p>By now, you've probably heard of the Samsung 840 Pro—it's the new fat cat in town in the SSD world, and sits atop our benchmark charts lazily cleaning itself while peering down at all the other SSDs clamoring to take its place. That drive is <em>redonk</em>, but there's only one problem—it’s quite expensive at $250. To satiate those who want a Samsung SSD but don't have two-fiddy lying around, Samsung introduced its midrange drive, the 840 Amateur (that's what we are calling it). The big deal with this drive is that it features an all-new kind of NAND known as TLC instead of using the very common MLC NAND (literally every consumer SSD on the market uses MLC). TLC stands for triple-level cell as opposed to multi-level cell, as it stores three bits per cell instead of two. More bits on the same wafer means higher capacities without increasing cost, but there's a catch—TLC NAND has lower overall endurance than MLC NAND, but don't get too worked up over it. Though the drive only has a three-year warranty, as opposed to the five-year warranty of the Pro version, it's still rated to run for a decade under normal consumer-usage patterns.</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><a class="thickbox" href="/files/u152332/samsung1_small_0.jpg"><img src="/files/u152332/samsung1_small.jpg" alt="Samsung’s vanilla-flavored 840 SSD is the first to use TLC NAND flash, which helps keep the price down." title="Samsung 840 Series 250GB" width="620" height="589" /></a></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><strong>Samsung’s vanilla-flavored 840 SSD is the first to use TLC NAND flash, which helps keep the price down.</strong></p>
<p>The drive itself features a slim 7mm form factor in case you want to stuff it inside an <a title="ultrabook" href="http://www.maximumpc.com/tags/Ultrabook" target="_blank">Ultrabook</a>, and it rides the SATA 6Gb/s rails. Its bundle includes Samsung's SSD Magician utility, which handles everything from drive diagnostics to data migration and more, but it lacks a 3.5-inch bay adapter. It’s available in 120GB, 250GB (seen here), and 500GB versions; the 250GB version we tested is 232GB after formatting.</p>
<p>During testing, the 840 performed admirably, especially in sequential-read speeds, where it was the fastest drive in both the tests we use to measure this metric. In CrystalDiskMark it saturated the SATA 6Gb/s bus at 523.6MB/s, but its sequential-write speed was its Achilles’ heel at just 260.1MB/s. The OCZ Vertex 4, by comparison, is twice as fast. Its performance was similar in our four-command-queue test with a 64K file size, hitting 530.2MB/s read and 265.9MB/s write speeds in ATTO.</p>
<p>The drive deals pretty well with incompressible data too, taking the top spot in our AS SSD test for 4KB-write IOPS, but placing mid-pack in 4KB reads. When dealing with a heavy queue of 32 4K write commands, it placed third overall; not too shabby considering it's the least-expensive drive here.</p>
<p>In our real-world PCMark Vantage test, its score of 56,482 was again third-best, so it's once again better than average. Its Premiere Pro 20GB write-test time of 241 ties the OCZ Vertex 4, but all the drives are very close in this test, suggesting it's CPU-limited.</p>
<p>In our estimation, there's nothing wrong with the Samsung 840 SSD. It's a low-cost SSD, so you have to consider that factor when examining the benchmark scores. All the Internet rumors about TLC NAND being unreliable are just that—rumors. Nobody has worn out a TLC NAND device yet, and it would take quite a long time to ever do so; the same goes for MLC NAND, so don’t believe the trash talk. Also, we should point out that Samsung is not an SSD manufacturer that has a reputation for being unreliable. That said, aside from its excellent sequential-read speeds, there's not much else to get excited about with this SSD. It's a low-price drive with decent-to-great performance, and that's the bottom line.</p>
<div class="verdict"><img src="/sites/maximumpc.com/themes/maximumpc/i/mxpc_8.jpg" alt="score:8" title="score:8" width="250" height="80" /></div>
<p><strong>$180, <a href="http://www.samsung.com/pk/#latest-home" target="_blank">www.samsung.com</a></strong></p>
<div class="module orange-module article-module">
<div class="module orange-module article-module"><span class="module-name">Benchmarks</span><br />
<div class="module-content">
<div class="module-text full">
<div class="spec-table orange">
<table style="width: 620px; height: 313px;" border="0">
<thead> </thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="item"></td>
<td class="item-dark">Corsair Neutron</td>
<td>Samsung 840 Series</td>
<td>Intel 335 Series </td>
<td>OCZ Vertex 4</td>
<td>Crucial M4</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Controller</td>
<td>LAMD LM87800</td>
<td>Samsung MDX</td>
<td>SandForce SF-2281</td>
<td>Indilinx Everest 2</td>
<td>Marvell 9174</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="item">Capacity</td>
<td class="item-dark">240GB</td>
<td>250GB</td>
<td>240GB</td>
<td>256GB</td>
<td>256GB</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Price</td>
<td>$195</td>
<td>$180</td>
<td>$185</td>
<td>$200</td>
<td>$200</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>CrystalDiskMark</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Avg. Sustained Read (MB/s)</td>
<td>454.6</td>
<td><strong>523.6</strong></td>
<td>470</td>
<td>432.9</td>
<td>500</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Avg. Sustained Write (MB/s)</td>
<td>363.3</td>
<td>260.1</td>
<td>240.8</td>
<td><strong>500.9</strong></td>
<td>193.2</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>AS SSD</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>4KB Read (IOPS)</td>
<td>6,684</td>
<td>5,926</td>
<td>5,849</td>
<td><strong>7,779</strong></td>
<td>6,741</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>4KB Write (IOPS)</td>
<td>16,963</td>
<td><strong>18,245</strong></td>
<td>17,429</td>
<td>17,752</td>
<td>10,010</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>ATTO</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>64KB File Read (MB/s)</td>
<td>385</td>
<td><strong>530.2</strong></td>
<td>502.3</td>
<td>390</td>
<td>200.4</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>64KB File Write (MB/s)</td>
<td>379</td>
<td>265.9</td>
<td>430.5</td>
<td><strong>507</strong></td>
<td>449.7</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Iometer</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>4KB Random Write 32QD (IOPS)</td>
<td><strong>80,466</strong></td>
<td>62,937</td>
<td>48,289</td>
<td>74,143</td>
<td>29,632</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>PCMark Vantage x64</td>
<td><strong>70,030</strong></td>
<td>56,482</td>
<td>47,751</td>
<td>43,956</td>
<td>66,915</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Premiere Pro Write (sec)</td>
<td>243</td>
<td><strong>241</strong></td>
<td>246</td>
<td>241</td>
<td>258</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p><em>Best scores are bolded. Our current test bed is a 3.2GHz Core i5-3470K processor on a Gigabyte Z77X-UP4TH motherboard running Windows 7 Professional 64-bit. All tests used onboard 6Gb/s SATA ports with latest Intel drivers.<br /></em></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
http://www.maximumpc.com/article/features/midrange_ssd_2013#commentsMarch 20132013250GBcheapcorsairHard DriveHardwareHDDmaximum pcNeutron SeriesSamsung 840 Seriessolid state drivessdHard DrivesReviewsSSDFeaturesMon, 24 Jun 2013 23:20:55 +0000Josh Norem25567 at http://www.maximumpc.comCrucial M500 480GB SSD Reviewhttp://www.maximumpc.com/crucial_m500_480gb_ssd_review
<!--paging_filter--><h3><span style="font-size: 1.17em;">A winning package of low price and high performance&nbsp;</span></h3>
<p>The <strong>Crucial M500</strong> is the company’s third-generation 6Gb/s SSD, and the successor to the often-praised <a title="M4 SSD" href="http://www.maximumpc.com/article/reviews/crucial_m4_256gb_review" target="_blank">M4 SSD</a>, which we named the best Bang for your Buck SSD in December of 2012 due to its well-rounded package of decent performance at a great price. In our estimation, the new drive fulfills the same well-rounded role, though with much improved write speeds and massively increased capacities at lower prices thanks to its move to smaller process NAND flash. Not only does it come in the standard 120GB, 240GB, and the 480GB version you see before you, but it’s also offered in a pant-tightening 1TB version at just $600, making it the market's first truly affordable 1TB SSD. Since the terabyte drive was not available at press time, we’re taking a look at the 480GB version which sports the&nbsp;<em>exact</em>&nbsp;same specs as its big brother.</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><img src="/files/u154082/m500_ssd.jpg" alt="m500 ssd" title="m500 ssd" width="620" height="438" /></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><strong>The move to 20nm NAND has allowed Crucial to bump capacity up to 960GB with the M500&nbsp;</strong></p>
<p>The drive itself comes in a shiny 7mm silver enclosure, so you can jam it into an Ultrabook. A 9.5mm spacer is also included, but there is no 3.5-inch adapter in the box, nor is there any software in the box or online aside from a firmware updating tool, which is disappointing. Inside the M500’s shell we find <a title="crucial maximum pc" href="http://www.maximumpc.com/tags/crucial" target="_blank">Crucial</a> has moved from 25nm NAND to 20nm MLC NAND flash. Smaller process NAND offers benefits such as lower power consumption and increased capacities, but also reduces the NAND’s life span somewhat. Still, Crucial offers the drive with a 3-year warranty and says the drive can handle 40GB of data written to it every day for five years, so the drive’s NAND should last long enough even for hardcore data mongers. Crucial is still using a Marvell controller, though this is an updated version of the one used on the M4, and of course it has updated firmware.</p>
<p>In testing we saw the M500 post very respectable scores across the board, though none were the fastest we’ve seen, nor would we expect them to be at this price. The biggest improvement we see over the M4 is its write speeds, which have gone from 193MB/s in <a title="CrystalDiskMark" href="http://crystalmark.info/software/CrystalDiskMark/index-e.html" target="_blank">CrystalDiskMark</a> to 422MB/s, and that difference shows in the AS SSD compressed data test as well, showing almost a doubling of speed from its successor. The ATTO test mirrors our other results, showing the drive capable of around 500MB/s read speeds and 422MB/s write speeds, which is superb for a "value" drive. Its IOmeter score of 83,354 IOPS is also top-of-its-class as well, as is its <a title="PCMark Vantage" href="http://www.futuremark.com/benchmarks/pcmark-vantage/" target="_blank">PCMark Vantage</a> HDD test score of 71,619. Oddly, its <a title="Sony Vegas" href="http://www.sonycreativesoftware.com/vegassoftware" target="_blank">Sony Vegas</a> score is unchanged from the M4 however, so it's possible the Marvell controller still has a tough time with data compression duties when writing huge files, 20GB in our scenario.&nbsp;</p>
<p>Overall the M500 shows just how far value drives have progressed, since this drive is about as fast as the fastest SSDs available a year ago. When compared to its most direct competitor though — the <a title="Samsung 840 review" href="http://www.maximumpc.com/article/%5Bprimary-term%5D/samsung_840_pro_series_ssd_review" target="_blank">Samsung 840</a> 500GB — the two are pretty evenly matched though the Crucial drive was a little faster in more tests. The <a title="Samsung" href="http://www.maximumpc.com/tags/Samsung" target="_blank">Samsung</a> drive costs about $40 less though, has the same warranty and better software support, making it a nail-biter between them.</p>
<p><span style="font-weight: bold;">MSRP: $400, www.crucial.com</span></p>
<h3>Benchmarks</h3>
<p style="text-align: center;"><img src="/files/u154082/m500.png" alt="crucial m500 benchmarks" title="crucial m500 benchmarks" width="468" height="669" /></p>
<p><strong><span style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Best scores are bolded. Test system consists of Gigabyte Z77X-UP4 motherboard, </strong></p>
<p style="text-align: left;"><strong><span style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Intel Core i5-3470, 8GB of RAM, Windows 7 64-bit.&nbsp;</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: left;">&nbsp;</p>
http://www.maximumpc.com/crucial_m500_480gb_ssd_review#comments480gbcheapCrucial M500fastHard DriveHardwaremaximum pcReviewSamsung 840solid state drivessdstorageNewsReviewsSSDWed, 17 Apr 2013 19:30:54 +0000Josh Norem25379 at http://www.maximumpc.comHighPoint RocketCache 3240x8 Reviewhttp://www.maximumpc.com/highpoint_rocketcache_3240x8_review
<!--paging_filter--><h3>Takes SSD caching to a whole new level</h3>
<p>It’s tough to wrap your head around <strong>HighPoint’s RocketCache</strong>, so we’ll try to sum it up as being simply crazy performance, if you’re willing to deal with the configuration hassles.</p>
<p>The RocketCache is a x8 PCIe 2.0 card that lets you connect up to four SATA devices to it via a Medusa-like cable with four SATA 6Gb/s connectors on it. The card lets you run two HDDs with two SSDs for caching, or—more crazy—one HDD with three SSDs for insane caching. That’s not all. You can select between maximum performance, maximum performance with cache protection, RAID 1 with two hard drives and two SSDs for caching speed (maximum performance and protection), and maximum protection, which is RAID 1 with cache written to disks. One important note is that this device is not bootable, which is very unfortunate.</p>
<p><img src="/files/u154082/rocketcash4942.jpg" alt="highpoint rocketcache" title="highpoint rocketcache" width="620" /></p>
<p>To test the RocketCache, we grabbed a WD 1TB Black drive, two <a title="OCZ vertex 4" href="http://www.maximumpc.com/article/%5Bprimary-term%5D/ocz_vertex_4_256gb_review" target="_blank">OCZ Vertex 4</a> SSDs, and one <a title="Intel 335 review" href="http://www.maximumpc.com/article/%5Bprimary-term%5D/intel_335_series_ssd_240gb_review" target="_blank">Intel 335 Series SSD</a>, and we ran all tests in Maximum Performance mode, which takes roughly 22GB from each SSD and stripes it together into a 66GB cache. Like other caching products, the size of the 1TB drive remained unchanged, and the extra space on the SSDs not being used for caching—about 217GB or so—is also still available as individual volumes. Since each SSD has its own lane to send and receive data, the configuration is theoretically able to saturate the PCIe interface with up to 1,500MB/s transfer speeds, and we got very close to that in testing with all four drives connected.</p>
<p>First, we connected just the hard drive by itself, and then the Vertex 4 SSD by itself, and ran our tests to show you what each drive is capable of by its lonesome (see benchmark chart). We then ran the HDD with each SSD added, one at a time, and ran our tests several times in order to see if performance would improve as the card began to cache the data used in the tests. Sure enough, it did, and each successive test run showed us increasing speed until we hit a ceiling. It didn’t take long for the 1TB hard drive to become as fast as an SSD, and in many cases performance surpassed that of the lone Vertex 4 SSD, which is not surprising. As an example, when we ran <a title="hd tune" href="http://www.hdtune.com/" target="_blank">HD Tune</a> on the one-SSD-plus-1TB combo, we initially saw the drive hit 107MB/s sequential read speeds (the same score it hit on its own), then 169MB/s on the next run, then 194MB/s, and on it went all the way up to 242MB/s. <a title="PCMark" href="http://www.futuremark.com/benchmarks/pcmark" target="_blank">PCMark</a> would also show us a “drive-only” score first, around 5,000, then suddenly jump to 40,000 or so—a huge increase in speed.</p>
<p>The RocketCache works as advertised, in other words. The only problem is, who would use this device? We don’t see it being used with three SSDs, due to expense (small, fast SSDs aren’t that cheap), though if you can swing it you’ll be a happy camper. The more interesting aspects are the RAID 1 options, which grant you huge-drive security with the safety of RAID and the speed advantage of drive caching. That is a truly unique combination of performance and security, and makes the RocketCache an interesting product that would kicks ass if we could boot from it.</p>
<p><strong>$160,</strong> <a href="http://www.highpoint-tech.com/">www.highpoint-tech.com</a></p>
http://www.maximumpc.com/highpoint_rocketcache_3240x8_review#commentsFebruary 2013cachefebruary 2013HardwareHardwareHighPoint RocketCache 3240x8maximum pcpcie 2.0ReviewssdReviewsSSDMon, 15 Apr 2013 23:25:14 +0000Josh Norem 25356 at http://www.maximumpc.comCorsair Neutron GTX 480GB Reviewhttp://www.maximumpc.com/corsair_neutron_gtx_480gb_review
<!--paging_filter--><h3>Meet the new boss, same as the old boss</h3>
<p>When we last paid a visit to the <a title="Corsair Neutron GTX 2012" href="http://www.maximumpc.com/article/%5Bprimary-term%5D/corsair_neutron_gtx_240gb_review" target="_blank">Corsair Neutron GTX late last year</a>, we declared it one wicked-fast SSD, but it was unfortunately nicked at the finish line by the <a title="Samsung 840 Pro" href="http://www.maximumpc.com/article/%5Bprimary-term%5D/samsung_840_pro_series_ssd_review" target="_blank">Samsung 840 Pro</a>. <a title="Corsair maxpc" href="http://www.maximumpc.com/tags/Corsair" target="_blank">Corsair</a> isn't too worried about that, though, and seems to have adopted an "upwards and onwards" mentality we see manifested in the capacious 480GB variant of the GTX that landed on our test bed this time around. Like its smaller-capacity brethren, it's sporting a brand-spankin'-new Link A Media controller (LAMD) that is exclusive to Corsair at this time, and it's wedded to Toshiba 24nm toggle-NAND. Running the show is an ARM microcontroller that pumps data through a SATA 6Gb/s connection. The Neutron GTX is also a slim 7mm jobbie, so it'll fit in even the most anorexic <a title="ultrabook maximum pc" href="http://www.maximumpc.com/tags/ultrabooks" target="_blank">Ultrabooks</a>. Desktop jockeys are also given consideration via the included 3.5-inch bay adapter.</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><a class="thickbox" href="/files/u152332/ssd_1_small_1.jpg"><span style="font-size: 10px;"><img src="/files/u152332/ssd_1_small_0.jpg" title="Corsair Neutron GTX 480GB" width="620" height="462" /></span></a></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: 10px;"><strong>Corsair’s Neutron GTX is serious business with 2 million hours MTBF and a five-year warranty.</strong></span></p>
<p style="text-align: left;">&nbsp;</p>
<p style="text-align: left;">Though it’s natural to focus on the specs of a drive like this, it's worth pointing out that this thing is built to last with a mean time between failure rating of 2 million hours, the longest rating you'll ever see for an SSD. Corsair also backs it up with a five-year warranty, which is also an industry-topper.</p>
<p style="text-align: left;">In testing, the GTX tore up our benchmark charts in heavily queued workloads, dominating even its old foe the Samsung 840 Pro. This dominance was seen in both the Iometer test, where we queue up 32 4KB write requests and hammer the drive mercilessly, as well as in the AS SSD 4KB incompressible data test where the GTX even outpaced the Samsung 840 Pro by a hair in write speeds.</p>
<p style="text-align: left;">In compressible 64KB sequential read and write tests the Neutron GTX also performed extremely well, throwing down a sequential read speed of 491MB/s and write speed of 391MB/s, placing it just slightly behind the <a title="maxpc samsung" href="http://www.maximumpc.com/tags/Samsung" target="_blank">Samsung</a> drive in read speeds but a bit further behind in write speeds. In <a title="CrystalDiskMark" href="http://crystalmark.info/software/CrystalDiskMark/index-e.html" target="_blank">CrystalDiskMark</a> the Neutron GTX also fell slightly below its 500MB+ claimed speeds, at 436MB/s and 473MB/s, making this the drive’s worst showing in our benchmark suite. Admittedly, nobody would argue that 400MB/s speeds are slow, but when compared to its competition the drive is slightly off the mark here.</p>
<p style="text-align: left;">Finally we come to our <a title="PC Mark Vantage" href="http://www.futuremark.com/benchmarks/pcmark-vantage/">PC Mark Vantage</a> "real world" test, where the Neutron took our number one spot by a decisive margin, its score almost double that of some older drives like the <a title="Crucial M4 review" href="http://www.maximumpc.com/article/reviews/crucial_m4_256gb_review">Crucial M4</a> and <a title="Vertex 4 review" href="http://www.maximumpc.com/article/%5Bprimary-term%5D/ocz_vertex_4_256gb_review" target="_blank">OCZ Vertex 4</a>.</p>
<p style="text-align: left;">When we previously reviewed the 240GB version of this drive we awarded it a 9 verdict, and that ruling stands. The drive is amazingly fast in a lot of tests, but not all. It’s certainly the fastest drive we’ve ever tested at this capacity, though, so as we begin to transition to 512GB the Neutron GTX will no doubt be a serious contender.&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p><strong>$560,</strong> <a class="thickbox" href="http://www.corsair.com/us/">www.corsair.com</a></p>
http://www.maximumpc.com/corsair_neutron_gtx_480gb_review#commentsJanuary 20132013480gbcorsair neutron GTXHardwareHardwareJanuary issue 2013maximum pcReviewsolid state drivessdstorageReviewsSSDFri, 05 Apr 2013 19:57:51 +0000Josh Norem25212 at http://www.maximumpc.com